or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP › OPTOMA ML500 LED 1280x800
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

OPTOMA ML500 LED 1280x800 - Page 16

post #451 of 680
What exactly is CA ?
post #452 of 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fnakfhe View Post

What exactly is CA ?

Chromatic aberration

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatic_aberration
post #453 of 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by RenStimpy View Post

For the last few days I have been wondering if I truly gave the ML500 a fair comparison. Based on looking at the picture I posted from POTR 2, the ML500 seemed pretty bad, almost like it wasn't HD. But thinking back to my viewings, I don't remember the picture always being that undefined. Wondering if I had made a mistake, I decided to view some scenes from POTR 2 on the ML500 again, and see if I could get a better image on the screen.

I'm happy to say that after adjusting the focus and placement of the PJ that I was able to get a sharper image than before. My guess is that when I originally had taken the picture, the focus either drifted or the PJ had shifted on its very temporary mount.

In order to correct any false impressions that I may have instilled, I have repeated the comparison of the Qumi and ML500 below. I still think the Qumi is sharper (note the details in the rock wall), but now the difference is not so striking. To make things easier I have put both images side by side so you don't need to scroll to compare. The Qumi is on the left and the ML500 is on the right.

Just to be clear...are both projectors showing the same dvd or blu-ray? If the sources are different that could account for a softer image on the Optoma.
post #454 of 680
Hello. Colors seems far away more natural on Optoma. What about the options, the parameters on the ML500 plz?
post #455 of 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fnakfhe View Post

Looks like he is speaking a 512bit encrypted language, let me decode the cypher for you.

I think he wants help to pick a projector to tide him,her over for the next two to three years until 1080p led projectors get cheeper and more common. As it stands right now he thinks that he will have to spend aproxamatly 1200+.

What can he get now for less than that, with. Good specs.

Yeah - that's i'm trying to say.

Thanks
post #456 of 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raine0 View Post

RenStimpy, after having the Optoma for a few days, what do you think of it now? Do you still find the picture too soft? And also, I read that people complain about CA with this pj, but is it really that noticeable when viewing a movie?

After a few days, I'm still planning on returning the unit I have. The CA is noticeable to me during normal viewings. Profiles often have red edges on the right and green edges on the left. White text on dark backgrounds has a green blur along the bottom.

More than this, sometimes when I'm watching a get the impression that there is something similar to noise reduction being applied by the PJ. Details can appear smeared, and often people in the images look like they have clay faces. I didn't get this same impression with the Qumi.

But last night I was mostly watching the HD broadcasts of my local channels, which are overly compressed already. I want to spend more time with better quality HD sources to see if this impression repeats.
post #457 of 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sisyphus View Post

Just to be clear...are both projectors showing the same dvd or blu-ray? If the sources are different that could account for a softer image on the Optoma.

Yes, both captures are from the same source (a HD broadcast by ABC, so I'm assuming 720p) over HDMI to the projectors.
post #458 of 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by RenStimpy View Post

After a few days, I'm still planning on returning the unit I have. The CA is noticeable to me during normal viewings. Profiles often have red edges on the right and green edges on the left. White text on dark backgrounds has a green blur along the bottom.

More than this, sometimes when I'm watching a get the impression that there is something similar to noise reduction being applied by the PJ. Details can appear smeared, and often people in the images look like they have clay faces. I didn't get this same impression with the Qumi.

But last night I was mostly watching the HD broadcasts of my local channels, which are overly compressed already. I want to spend more time with better quality HD sources to see if this impression repeats.


Can other owners of the Optoma confirm that their units give similar results and impressions as well?
post #459 of 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by anachoret View Post

Hello. Colors seems far away more natural on Optoma. What about the options, the parameters on the ML500 plz?

The ML500 has an option to restrict the color space to something that approaches the standard, which the Qumi doesn't. I don't have equipment so I can't report on how accurate the colors are, but they do appear more so than the Qumi.

All my screenshots are from the ML500 running in the non-extended "standard" color mode.
post #460 of 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by anachoret View Post

Hello. Colors seems far away more natural on Optoma. What about the options, the parameters on the ML500 plz?

What colour is that stone wall in the background supposed to be? On my monitor the photo from the Qumi shows it as blue but it is grey on the Optoma.
post #461 of 680
I don't remember exactly but I suppose it might be in grey tone, so the Optoma delivers more natural colors while it sounds more blurred.
post #462 of 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by andysm View Post

What colour is that stone wall in the background supposed to be? On my monitor the photo from the Qumi shows it as blue but it is grey on the Optoma.

I believe the wall is grey, but with the overcast skies and rainfall there is a slight blue tint to them as well. At least on my Sharp there is a slight amount of blue in the background. Again, I don't have any equipment so I don't know what is accurate, but I believe the Sharp was measured by cine4home.de to be pretty good in this area.
post #463 of 680
Ok, tks. Then it means that these new led's VPs seem not really good, not as good then Qumi or HW300 for example.
post #464 of 680
Guys, someone else said it in here already.

Its the lens used. the optics or glass (in this case plastic lens) is what is causing this degradation.

So there we have it, QUMI is better than the ML500, right. Thats what i take, and i have the ML500.
post #465 of 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fnakfhe View Post

Guys, someone else said it in here already.

Its the lens used. the optics or glass (in this case plastic lens) is what is causing this degradation.

So there we have it, QUMI is better than the ML500, right. Thats what i take, and i have the ML500.

Its not possible to say glass lenses are always better than plastic lenses. Lens quality depends heavily on the optical architecture of the entire lens assembly and that the optics design takes into account the peculiarities of the lens material when subject to various stresses during operation into account. For the consumer, the only real requirment is that the lens can consistently deliver a certain level of performance while being tolerant to the stresses placed upon it during operation. If an all glass lens is a marketing feature, and customers are willing to pay a lot more for it, then I'd do it without any hesitation

From RenStimpy's end results, it seems the Qumi has superior optics compared to the ML500, but the truth is Qumi's lens is 5 elements with 2 out of the 5 lenses made of plastic. I don't have optics information for the ML500 yet, but the wheels are turning and I expect a report on my desk next week

I would not be surprised to find a significant number of plastic lenses inside the ML500 lens, but it really doesn't matter, the final performance that can be delivered is what counts.

With the above said, optics designers who have designed with glass and are familiar with glass properties usually stumble the first few times when incorporating plastic into their designs. A lot of assumptions about glass cannot be made for plastic and there is no book is existence that describes ALL the peculiarities. But once an optical designer can understand how to design properly with plastic, plastic offers much more optical design freedom while being cheaper and lighter for the consumer and also frees the manufacturer with having to deal with 3-6 month lead times for specialty glasses (such as fluoride low dispersion varieties). Imagine having to wait 3-6 months for a projector because a certain type of glass isn't available
post #466 of 680
Glass has different melting points depending on what the composition of the glass actually is. Standard soda lime glass (the most common kind of glass) melts at something on the order of 1500 °C, or about 2700 °F, while top drawer silicon oxide has a glass melting point of in excess of 2300 °C, or some 4200 °F.

Plastic melting points
The melting point of HDPE (High Density Polyethelyne) is about 130 ºC
The melting point of LDPE (Low Density Polyethelyne) is about 110 ºC
The melting point of PET (Polyethylene terphthalate) is about 250—260 ºC
The melting point of PP (Polypropylene) is about 160—170 ºC
The melting point of PS (Polystyrene) is about 70—115 ºC
The melting point of PVC (Polyvinyl Chloride) is about 75—90 ºC

Now, if we are using a big bright led bulb to shine through the lens I want glass, it's not a consumer selling point, it's a function of design.

Stop supporting optoma's cost cutting measures, while we still pay a premium for the unit.
post #467 of 680
Firmware update under 'Downloads' on Optoma's website.

http://www.optomausa.com/products/detail/ML500

I forgot to check the stock firmware version. Can someone relay this information to me? Thanks.
post #468 of 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by brndnsmth View Post

Firmware update under 'Downloads' on Optoma's website.

http://www.optomausa.com/products/detail/ML500

I forgot to check the stock firmware version. Can someone relay this information to me? Thanks.

Do not update.

The video that played fine is now crashing or halting.

The update to my firmware f'ed it up.

Also it shows null, for the main menu icon names.

Also the auto tilt adjustment to the screen is now flipping up and down, it's not steady.

I say it's a bad firmware. Also there is no way to flash back to original which is crazy, please post the original firmware flash file.
post #469 of 680
Interesting, I'm not having any of those issues.
post #470 of 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fnakfhe View Post

Do not update.

The video that played fine is now crashing or halting.

The update to my firmware f'ed it up.

Also it shows null, for the main menu icon names.

Also the auto tilt adjustment to the screen is now flipping up and down, it's not steady.

I say it's a bad firmware. Also there is no way to flash back to original which is crazy, please post the original firmware flash file.

I guess I won't be updating until I hear something positive. Plus, mines is perfectly fine the way it is.
post #471 of 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by brndnsmth View Post

Interesting, I'm not having any of those issues.

Well, ya.

If you never used it to play 1080p MKV video files then you will never see these issues.

Also, for the null on each icon in the home screen, that happens when your on HDMI then turn off the HDMI item (xbox) then it will go back to home screen with icons saying null.

see the picture to see what im talking about.

Im so sick of the carelessness that was put into this projector.

From design, and support and firmware updates. Its just a SH1T SHOW operation.
LL
post #472 of 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by blee0120 View Post

I guess I won't be updating until I hear something positive. Plus, mines is perfectly fine the way it is.

Can you please give me the firmware version you have?

There is two different numbers in your system.

first goto menu on the remote then goto info, its in one of the sub menues.

second, from the home screen goto settings icon, then goto system icon, then goto info icon.

these two ways will give you two diffrent numbers. please post your findings for me.

I want to be able to verify this when optoma post the original firmware. if they ever do!
post #473 of 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fnakfhe View Post

Glass has different melting points depending on what the composition of the glass actually is. Standard soda lime glass (the most common kind of glass) melts at something on the order of 1500 °C, or about 2700 °F, while top drawer silicon oxide has a glass melting point of in excess of 2300 °C, or some 4200 °F.

Plastic melting points
The melting point of HDPE (High Density Polyethelyne) is about 130 ºC
The melting point of LDPE (Low Density Polyethelyne) is about 110 ºC
The melting point of PET (Polyethylene terphthalate) is about 250260 ºC
The melting point of PP (Polypropylene) is about 160170 ºC
The melting point of PS (Polystyrene) is about 70115 ºC
The melting point of PVC (Polyvinyl Chloride) is about 7590 ºC

Now, if we are using a big bright led bulb to shine through the lens I want glass, it's not a consumer selling point, it's a function of design.

Stop supporting optoma's cost cutting measures, while we still pay a premium for the unit.

Glass is good and all, but its much more complex than just material melting temperatures. But lets agree that we disagree
post #474 of 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by anomaly123 View Post

Glass is good and all, but its much more complex than just material melting temperatures. But lets agree that we disagree

Yes, quality of glass for a lens has nothing to do with melting temps.

I was simply pointing out the focus issue. as the lens heats up from the LED it changes its properties. and expands or moves or warps. thus the change in focus over the 20 min time span to reach equilibrium with the max heat point of the led at the given distance.

But if it was a glass lens (no necessary to be high quality,) the focus issue would NOT be evident due to the higher melting points of the glass.
post #475 of 680
Greetings All

Another final update, first off, my last post I didn't mention I was in ECO mode (I had said this was the mode I run in in previous posts), the projector was on for 2 hours prior to taking those measurements.

And also the room temp was 20.5Deg C, there has been focus talk, I thought I saw it 1 day then the next I didn't. When I didn't think I was having a focus issue was when I first got it and room temp was close to 26 C during the testing, BUT. Now living in New England where 1 month the temp is 85 and the next is 55, I have a focus issue.

First off let me say what I am calling a focus issue with my ML500 is NOTHING like my focus problem with my Qumi, it is like comparing breaking a nail vs breaking an arm, that is how drastic the difference is to me.

My projector is in my family room the room is 3/4th under ground and where the heat is not on yet it get cold down there now ( 60 this morning) and when I turn it on I have to focus it, 5 minutes another focus and it's done for the day. I believe the more extreme the delta temp is between off temp and running temp may play a factor in this focus thing, but this is not the real reason for this post.

My HTPC got nailed again (it is my fault, I do things people shouldn't) so I had to format and reload all my software again. While fixing my HTPC I plugged in my back up computer and was surprised at how much better the colors of the desk top were, then I had that moment we all have (DOH).

I downloaded, unziped, then copied to a DVD this file http://www.wuala.com/alluringreality...c/AVCHD-2d.exe using the instructions found here http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=948496 . I ran the HD-DVD in my Blu Ray player in it's default settings and set the projector to the Blu Ray player, the computer was next.

Downloading this file http://www.spectracal.com/downloads/...c_gen_v1.2.msi I set my computer to the projector, BUT, little did I know my video card separates the different kind of video.

Example, when watching HDTV from my USB stick my video card calls that video and a different group of settings need to be adjusted, then if I watch Netflix via the computer, that video is treated like the desktop and the desk top adjustments need to be adjusted.

So in closing, to set up any of these projectors for Blu Ray (and if a PC is also used) it is going to take a while, the first is to get the projector to display well with the player, then all other adjustments are via the video card.

Hope it makes sense

AFM

ps. I'm 184 hours in ECO and am actually happy with my purchase.
post #476 of 680
Afineman, after having the Optoma for awhile now, what do you think of it? Picture, noise, etc. etc.
post #477 of 680
Raine0

Remember I'm coming from a LG HS 201, with that thought in mind.

The Optoma was a great upgrade, I used the LG in normal and the Optoma in ECO mode, the ECO mode is much brighter than Normal in the LG.

The resolution of the Optpma blows away the 201 (same seating distance, I no longer see pixels), color has almost the same POP (Lg had greater color control, but today's setup (projector adjusted to cal disk in Blu Ray, then cal file from PC to adjust video card to projector) gives me really good color.

Noise (in ECO) it is a hair above the LG in normal mode, but my ears ring anyways so it does not bother me.

Focus, some days I have it others I don't (It may have something to do with room temp, but I can't say for sure yet), but projector is 3/4th arms distance away, so this too is a non issue.

I kind a had to buy this (17 inch monitor was not wife friendly when the 201 blew up), I really was wanted the Acer (from what I had read in the releases), but from what I read in this forum it wasn't the shining star we all had thought it would be.

Raine0 the simple answer is YES I like the Optoma, good color, good lumen, good res, money well spent, and I'll be more than happy to keep this for the next 2+ years, with my HP screen and light controlled room this is the BEST image I've ever had on my screen to date.

Reliability/Longevity are the only UN-answered questions as of this typing I have 188 hrs in ECO mode, so I may be the one to find out where the failure point is.

For someone with a similar projector background as me I would strongly recommend buying this projector, but if you are going from a higher end 1080P projector to this you will be disappointed.


Well, that's my $.02 worth

AFM




Quote:
Originally Posted by Raine0 View Post

Afineman, after having the Optoma for awhile now, what do you think of it? Picture, noise, etc. etc.
post #478 of 680
One thing this thread has been missing is that there haven't been as many straight and simple screenshots of the projected image. Most of the ones I have posted have been some type of test shot, where I either had a test pattern up or the image was being compared to something else. Personally I don't give a lot of credence to screenshots as a measurement of PJ performance, but I think they are a lot of fun. The Qumi thread filled up for a few pages with a bunch of nice shots from various movies. To up the fun quotient in this thread, I though I would share some of my pictures from over the weekend.

But first I wanted to mention that my impressions of the ML500 are tending to be more and more positive. The focus issue isn't nearly as severe as the Qumi, the PJ is watchable when you first turn it on and then slightly shows more definition as it warms up. I'm also thinking that most of the softness to the image is due to CA, and in non competitive viewings it isn't as noticeable. Unless you have a PJ without the CA projecting at the same time on the same screen, you will probably miss it.

The reason I am saying this is that since my last few posts I have watched Star Wars II and III and Blu-ray, and I really enjoyed the viewings. The "clay-face" syndrome I had worried about before was nowhere to be seen. At this point I'm going to chalk that up to being compression artifacts in the ATSC signal (since this projector is much brighter than my last I can see more artifacts that before).

I also did some more side by side viewings with my Sharp 720p, and while I did seem some loss of detail, it was slight. And the softness really seems to be due to CA. From the seating position if I saw an area of the picture that looked softer than my Sharp, typically when I got up to the screen to pixel peep I would see green or red blurs around the affected area (from CA). After seeing some close-ups of the Acer K330, which appears to have way less CA, I'm hoping my unit is just a lemon and after a swap I will see better performance here.

The one new issue I've seen after my recent comparison is that the ML500 has more dithering than my Sharp. I noticed this during a POTR comparison with the two PJs. Once I got to the screen I saw that even in the mid-tones the ML500 had visible dithering. The Sharp XV-Z3000 had no visible dithering in the same areas. This goes against my expectations, I thought that with LEDs the bit-depth for colors would increase and there would be less need of dithering.

With that being said, in the next post I will show some captures of Star Wars III on the ML500. This has been a big project for me, with the ML500 being so bright, getting some of these scenes captured has been very difficult. My camera has a weak red channel that can get over-exposed easily. With the strong reds of the ML500 I was seeing a lot of the scenes being blown out. Over the weekend I've learned how to do HDR with my camera and I've been using it to workaround the red channel issues. Even with this technique the captures don't represent what you get on the screen. The colors of the ML500, while appearing accurate, are so rich and saturated that a lot of scenes are just a joy to watch. The same effect isn't coming acros from looking at the pictures on my laptop screen, but I'm not going to let it stop me from posting them.
post #479 of 680
Great to hear some positive posts are cropping up again. This thread started with positive comments coming from early adopters, then all of a sudden took a a sharp nose dive.

I'm going from what I read from ye users, so I was buying smth one minute, then kinda gave up and started looking at bulb pjs the next and now my interest has gone pretty much back again! Great stuff!

Great idea RenStimpey, looking forward to some screenshots...
post #480 of 680
These are some captures from Star Wars III Blu-ray on the Optoma ML500. As I said before, I'm posting these just for fun and to take a break from my nit-picking of the unit. The more I stop comparing and just start using it, the more I'm enjoying this PJ.























New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP › OPTOMA ML500 LED 1280x800